Have Chelsea,Manchester City and PSG ruined football?

I'd say Chelsea to a lesser extent although they kickstarted this process of 'Oil Money revolution'.

I'd hold the likes of PSG and City largely responsible for the extreme inflation in the transfer market.I mean even an average player nowadays is going at a minimum of €20-25m.There are so many examples.

Some of the inflated transfer deals by City.

Jo-£21m
Wayne Bridge-£11.5m
Roque Santa Cruz-£18m
Joleon Lescott-£24m
Emmanuel Adebayor-£25m
Alexander Kolarov-£20m
James Milner-£19m
Mario Balotelli-£26m

PSG recently spent €45m on some Brazilian teenager.

If this is not inflation then i dont know what it is.

In the process its forcing the big clubs who follow a prudent method of spending into splashing big money on players.Recent example is Bayern buying Martinez for €40m.The market situation forced them to fork such a big amount.I dont need an explanation on this particular transfer as i could still give some other examples so as to prove my case.

The big teams like Madrid have the cash so they are barely affected by the situation whereas some of the other 'Glamour' teams who cant compete with these nouvo riche clubs are generally left behind.It is survival of the fittest afterall nowadays.

This leaves with no breathing space for the smaller clubs in the end.

Shrekkisfat wrote:

Adit wrote:

or may be Youre uneducated about anything about real madrid and brags about how perez is a sugar daddy (which is retarded statement to begin with ) and you want me to go know about RM now? oh dear.

I probably know more about Real Madrid than you do and I barely even watch them.

yeah and i knew your wealth of knowledge from your post about ''perez the sugar daddy'' onto the list of trolls.

Adit wrote:

Shrekkisfat wrote:

Adit wrote:

or may be Youre uneducated about anything about real madrid and brags about how perez is a sugar daddy (which is retarded statement to begin with ) and you want me to go know about RM now? oh dear.

I probably know more about Real Madrid than you do and I barely even watch them.

yeah and i knew your wealth of knowledge from your post about ''perez the sugar daddy'' onto the list of trolls.

why dont you prove me wrong then.

Surag wrote:I'd say Chelsea to a lesser extent although they kickstarted this process of 'Oil Money revolution'.

I'd hold the likes of PSG and City largely responsible for the extreme inflation in the transfer market.I mean even an average player nowadays is going at a minimum of €20-25m.There are so many examples.

Some of the inflated transfer deals by City.

Jo-£21m
Wayne Bridge-£11.5m
Roque Santa Cruz-£18m
Joleon Lescott-£24m
Emmanuel Adebayor-£25m
Alexander Kolarov-£20m
James Milner-£19m
Mario Balotelli-£26m

PSG recently spent €45m on some Brazilian teenager.

If this is not inflation then i dont know what it is.

In the process its forcing the big clubs who follow a prudent method of spending into splashing big money on players.Recent example is Bayern buying Martinez for €40m.The market situation forced them to fork such a big amount.I dont need an explanation on this particular transfer as i could still give some other examples so as to prove my case.

The big teams like Madrid have the cash so they are barely affected by the situation whereas some of the other 'Glamour' teams who cant compete with these nouvo riche clubs are generally left behind.It is survival of the fittest afterall nowadays.

This leaves with no breathing space for the smaller clubs in the end.

this fits the small clubs, they get more when they could get less if not for some people setting the base high

i only see bilbao getting richer from this situation where they could get nothing when its likable the player would leave for a bigger club either way

BarrileteCosmico wrote:The CL (and the revenue generated by belonging to it) has been more damaging to football than the new-rich clubs.

Completely agree.

Shrekkisfat wrote:

Adit wrote:

Shrekkisfat wrote:

Adit wrote:

or may be Youre uneducated about anything about real madrid and brags about how perez is a sugar daddy (which is retarded statement to begin with ) and you want me to go know about RM now? oh dear.

I probably know more about Real Madrid than you do and I barely even watch them.

yeah and i knew your wealth of knowledge from your post about ''perez the sugar daddy'' onto the list of trolls.

why dont you prove me wrong then.

To stop this argument thats going nowhere, Perez can't possibly be a sugar daddy, since Real Madrid is a company owned by the fans, which means no one can invest a single penny in the team from his own pockets, it all has to come from money the team has generated from its own over the years. Thats why Madrid are usually seen as the rich guys since they can spend such amounts of money, without the help of sugar daddies. Oh, and our previous president stripped out of presidency and driven to court by Madrid itself (As an entity) 'cause he invested a very small amount of his money to bring a player.

Real madrid makes their own money. We don't have a sugar daddy. Adit knows alot more then you..

I am a neo-liberal thinker.
And I say that this system is an instance of the capitalist dream...
So, why not?
Football can't be ruined by anyone. It's too perfect.

Chelsea will make FFP, as for the whole ruining thing. That is just meh, football was always going to expand with more and more countries developing and being able to reach out at a wider audience.

It's all about money these days anyways, overrall football is better with the injection of cash in different teams. Who wants the same teams winning everything over and over again, competition is good .

Not ruined but certainly spoiled it a little. Good for economy though

I wouldn't say "ruined", but I do personally really hate teams buying success. I cant wait until the fairplay rules come along and fix this.

How is it ruined? Explain to me please..so when RM and barca or the top 4-6 in the PL never change due to difference in TV rights its fine, but when a sugar daddy comes along and changes the playing field its bad? This is one of the best things that's happened.. grow up.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:The CL (and the revenue generated by belonging to it) has been more damaging to football than the new-rich clubs.

This as well as the huge gap between EL and CL revenue

Shrekkisfat wrote:Not like right now though.Oh and btw the biggest Sugar daddy was Perez.

You are very ignorant.

Perhaps from the perspective of fans who don't support teams regularly in the Champions League football has been "ruined", because nowadays it's extremely difficult to elevate a club to another level without significant investment and not every club has the luck to be chosen by a wealthy investor. So there's an element of unfairness there.

However, Chelsea, Manchester City and PSG aren't responsible for this. The fact is that every club in existence has had some form of investment from their owner on various scales at one point or another. Chelsea, Manchester City and PSG have merely done it on a grander scale.

In reality, what's created the divide between the top clubs and everyone else are the ever increasing tv contracts for domestic and European football. A rich club becomes richer, and then uses those riches to build a stronger squad than everyone else, then enters Europe to become even richer and build even more. Rinse and repeat.

Heavy investment through immensely wealthy owners is just a shortcut to an already existing financial jackpot.

Football will never be ruined....But the transfer market and some great teams are being ruined because these teams like Manchester city, R.Madrid or Chelsea are spending way more than they ever needed too and pulling some stupid moves on the market they are basically the rich spoilt children of the footballing world and they only make the poor poorer.

we offered you Sahin, Carvalho, Lass and Kaka what more do you want

Abramovich and Gooner Jay29 are spot on.Ruined was perhaps too strong of a word,my point is if it continues on the same trend small to midtable teams level will drop because these clubs will keep taking talent from their youth teams or talent that they bought for cheap and turned out to be extremely good.I know for example that Felliani and Jelavic will most probably leave in the next 1 or 2 years and Mirallas too if he shines.The same will happen with most of these clubs too,like Sunderland,Swansea,Fulham,Aston Villa etc.....because its like each time any of those teams have a good run their top players will be chased down by these teams which may make them never rise to the top.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:The CL (and the revenue generated by belonging to it) has been more damaging to football than the new-rich clubs.

You sir, have won the thread.

You can never really ruin football.

As for the sugar daddy thing, it's been around for a long time now and if anything it makes football more exciting.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:The CL (and the revenue generated by belonging to it) has been more damaging to football than the new-rich clubs.

nonsense... all of cl revenue we got for being dumped out in round of 16 was something like 16 mil, if not less than that... that's hardly make or break money for clubs who aspire to qualify for the competition...

this "rich get richer, poor get poorer" crap sounds nice on paper but it doesn't actually work anywhere... look at the massive turnover in teams qualifying for the cl from the top leagues, and look at how many different clubs win the smaller leagues where the cl money should have more of an effect... either there is still very nice parity at the top (eredivisie had 4 different winners in last 5 years, so did turkish league, cyprus - all countries who regularly send participants to cl group stages), or the leagues are still dominated by historical powerhouses (greece, switzerland, denmark...)

plus, the quality of the champions of smaller countries is very similar so it's not like any of them regularly breeze through knockout stages into the group stage where the money's actually at

meanwhile, psg can throw bags of money at every player under the sun because some rich guy decided to get into this football thing, ruining the transfer market and hoarding all the talent they want... please do enlighten me how cl is worse for football